Thread: Numbers:Immigration Amendments on War Bill Fall

DoD Authorization Debate Comes to End; Immigration Amendments Not Pursued


Border Patrol Agents Ramos & Compean
Amnesty for agricultural workers
Amnesty and Guestworker/amnesty
H-1B
REAL ID Act
Reducing legal immigration
State and local police in immigration law enforcement
Totalization — Social Security for illegal aliens
Workplace verification / Block illegal workers

(July 19) Yesterday, upon failure to invoke cloture (i.e., end debate) on an amendment to commence withdrawal of troops from Iraq within 120 days, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pulled H.R. 1585, the Defense Department authorization bill for fiscal year 2008, from further floor consideration. With this cessation in debate, amendments addressing amnesty for illegal aliens, mandatory workplace verification, expanded importation of foreign workers, and border security have – at least, for the time being – been laid on the table.


Sen. Durbin (D-Ill.)
Perhaps the most egregious example of an attempt to tack immigration "reform" on to a defense bill came from Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). In proposing SA 2237 (along with 16 cosponsors), Durbin offered up the "DREAM Act" as an amendment. The gist of this proposal, which has been offered by Durbin the past few legislative sessions as a stand-alone bill (including this session as S. 774), is that DHS would have been authorized to cancel removal for, or adjust to lawful permanent resident status (in other words, grant amnesty to), an alien who is inadmissible or deportable in cases where the alien demonstrated that he:

has maintained continuous presence in the United States for five years and was not yet 16 years old upon initial entry;
is of "good moral character" and is not inadmissible or deportable on certain criminal grounds or on the basis of being a risk to national security; and
has been admitted to an institution of higher education, has attained a high school diploma, or has obtained a GED in the United States.
The DREAM Act also would have granted amnesty to illegal aliens who have satisfied these criteria as of enactment.

Another key component of this measure is that it would have repealed existing statutory provisions denying illegal aliens’ eligibility for in-state tuition unless a U.S. national was similarly eligible without regard to state residence, thus placing the rights of those in our country illegally above those of our own citizens, and, as a result, encouraging even more illegal immigration to the United States.


Sen. Cornyn (R-Texas)
Beyond the nightmare that is the DREAM Act, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who bravely spoke out against the Senate's so-called "grand compromise," proposed two amendments that would have undermined U.S. workers and, instead, fed Big Business' insatiable hunger for cheap, foreign labor. SA 2143 would have allowed the "recapturing" of "unused" employment-based (EB) visas from fiscal years 1996 and 1997 (even though visas not allocated in a certain category in any given year are made available for other categories, so there really is no such thing as an "unused" visa). In addition, the amendment would have raised the H-1B visa cap from 65,000 per year to 115,000 per year, more than double the number of EB immigrants admissible per year (from 140,000 to 290,000), and would have created exemptions from the EB visa cap for: (1) U.S.-educated scientists and engineers; (2) H-1Bs who have been working in science, technology, engineering, or math in the United States for three years preceding their application for an EB immigrant visa; (3) aliens with "extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics"; (4) "outstanding professors and researchers"; and (5) aliens granted "national interest waivers."

A second Cornyn amendment (SA 2141) would have established a new nonimmigrant worker, or "guestworker," program – the H-1A – for "international commuters" (i.e., aliens who live outside the United States, but who commute to and from work in the United States for up to 10 months in any calendar year). Up to 90,000 H-1A visas could have been issued each year, with those visas being valid for three years.

Another Cornyn amendment, SA 2140, would have established parity between Mexican nationals who possess a valid biometric Border Crossing Card (BCC [also known as a "laser visa"]) who have completed the necessary security checks (a rarity in today's lax enforcement environment) who visit the United States and Canadian "visitors" by allowing BCC bearers to remain in the United States for up to six months. Currently, Mexican nationals with BCCs may only stay in the United States for up to 30 days, while Canadians possessing "tourist" visas may stay up to one year. In addition, SA 2140 would have retained DHS' authority to set the length of time those with BCCs may remain in the United States and, also, would have authorized that agency to modify the length of admission on a case-by-case basis if good cause exists. Finally, the amendment would have made a Mexican national inadmissible for the BCC admission period if: (1) he is inadmissible as a nonimmigrant; (2) he has previously violated his nonimmigrant status; or (3) the BCC was not processed through a machine reader at the U.S. port of entry.


Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) was directly involved with two immigration-related amendment. He sponsored SA 2253, which would have required all executive departments and agencies – as well as all DoD contractors and subcontractors – to participate in, and comply with the terms of, the Basic Pilot program, beginning 90 days following enactment. Grassley also cosponsored a Durbin amendment (SA 223 designed to address the problems of fraud and abuse in the H-1B "high-skill" and L-1 "intracompany transferee/specialized knowledge" nonimmigrant worker programs, as well as protect opportunities for U.S. workers. (This proposal mirrored the Durbin- and Grassley-backed "H-1B and L-1 Visa Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act of 2007" [S. 1035 {CLICK HERE for a full summary of this bill}].)

http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/congress.html

Do we need any further proof that the Scamnesty proposal is still alive and well in the Senate? It seems the elite are determined to sneak this legislative garbage past the American people bit by bit through amendments to vital legislation. Before you know it, "Poof- there it is! Amnesty!"

If we remain vigilant and manage to shut down every subversive vestige of legislation put forth as amendments, doesn't that also mean we will have to destroy every viable piece of legislation to which the amendments are attached? That said, what the heck then do we need with Congress in the first place?

Those guys better come together and put a stop to the shenanigans in their respective parties or they are all going to be looking at government from the outside next time they come up for election! I for one am fed up with the foxes guarding the henhouse!!!